MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P4-19-02: Young women with early stage breast cancer and their supportive care needs: Results from a regional survey

2017· article· en· W2593264550 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jenna Ratcliffe, Nicole Hodgson, Pradip Rana, Margaret Forbes, Michael A. Levine, Jonathan Sussman

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerNeeds assessmentDistressMedicineFamily medicineSocial supportCancerHealth careQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyNursingPsychologyClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Approximately 18% of all newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in Canada occur in women less than 50 years of age. Young women with breast cancer (YWBC) may experience unique physical and psycho-social issues yet there is a lack of data outlining their specific needs and concerns across the trajectory of care. This study described the unmet supportive care needs of YWBC at a regional cancer centre in southern Ontario, Canada. Objectives 1. To describe unmet supportive care needs of young women (<45 years) with early stage breast cancer in a representative region by using the Supportive Cancer Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). 2. To describe the level of satisfaction with information to support cancer treatment decision making and causes of distress among YWBC (<45 years) in a representative region. Study Design This study used a prospective survey design that was administered to consenting YWBC. The Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34) was used to measure respondents' need for cancer support and care. This instrument captures needs through 34-items that cover five domains: psychological needs, health system and informational needs, physical and daily living needs, patient care support needs and sexuality needs. In addition, an original 26-item survey questionnaire was administered. Survey items were developed from the recurring themes of an earlier project that informed 4 levels of inquiry: demographics, decision making/ informational support, disease and treatment characteristics, and causes of distress. Results Fifty-one patients were approached by a member of their circle of care. Of these patients, 35 completed the survey resulting in a 69% response rate. The majority of respondents were between the ages of 33 and 40 (48.6%), were diagnosed within 6 to 12 months of study entry (60.0%); had a university degree (51.4%); were married (82.9%) and (65.7%) have young children. The three most common Moderate to High Unmet Supportive Care needs (rated 4 or 5 on a 5-point Likert scale) were: “Worries of those close to you” (34.3%), “Fears about the cancer spreading” (34.3%), “Anxiety” (28.6%) all of which reside in the psychological domain. Overall respondents agreed or strongly agreed to statements regarding their level of satisfaction with information to support cancer treatment decision making provided by their oncology team. Respondents did score lower in satisfaction with the information their oncology team provided regarding fertility. In terms of psychosocial support, 40% percent of respondents reported they had met with a social worker and 17% reported attending a breast cancer support group. Conclusion The results highlight that the supportive care needs of many YWBC are unmet, particularly those related to psychological burden and fertility concerns. Early identification and appropriate referral to fertility specialists and/or supportive care social workers could improve current practice. Further research is needed to explore how barriers to fertility and supportive care needs of young adults with cancer may best be overcome. Citation Format: Ratcliffe J, Hodgson N, Rana P, Forbes M, Levine M, Sussman J. Young women with early stage breast cancer and their supportive care needs: Results from a regional survey [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-19-02.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.215
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening→French-language works237,207→